Sir

Analysis of science reforms in New Zealand raises serious questions about the future of science in New Zealand, particularly in the light of indications that government commitments to increase science funding will not be met in the 1998-99 budget. A subsequent response by P. M. Hargreaves, president of the Association of Crown Research Institutes (Nature 391 834; 1998), demands a response.

Hargreaves states that 349 new science positions have been established since the Crown Research Institutes (CRIs) were set up, but a breakdown of this figure reveals that it represents only 126 full-time equivalent research and development science positions (CRIs also have a commercial arm). Furthermore, only 21 additional positions for scientists are represented, a 1.6% increase in four years. In contrast, technical staff increased by 7.8% and support staff by 20%. Further analysis of recently released Ministry of Research, Science and Technology figures indicates that these are continuing trends in that the number of scientists declined by almost 4% between 1994 and 1996 while technicians increased by 10% and support staff by 25%.

The New Zealand Association of Scientists is particularly concerned about these marked shifts in employment in government research institutions “from research staff to non-scientists” referred to in the Nature article. These are disturbing trends which suggest that the reforms may have spawned a new wave of managerialism and bureaucracy on the New Zealand science scene.